Re: problems with free()

[leo mueller <llug.dan@googlemail.com>]

yeah, i was just wondering why doing a free() on the last example (the
char* stuff...) decreased the used mem by 'a.out' _immediately_ and on
my first example (source attached in 1st mail) _not_ (nothing happened
after free; only the os cleaned up after exit). i tried that several
times and got the same behaviour as mentioned, so i thought there
might be a bug in my source....

another fact would proof my assumption....

during programming (on that source) i first cleaned up my mem
recursively... which ended up in segfault when allocating more than
(e.g.) 1.5gig over the time, so a stack overflow might occur. instead
of
traversing my built tree recursively, i thought about putting the
lists with nodes (my 'parts' of the tree) into a linked list to solve
this issue. but i'm wondering about the following fact... freeing
recursivly made a visible decrease of my used mem in 'htop' while
freeing with my iterative variant made no decrease at all... so i
thought about a bug in my program... (but cannot find it....)

2009/4/28 Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com>:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:20, leo mueller <llug.dan@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> hi all,
>>
>> i got a little problem with free() ... i am allocating mem for a
>> special struct and putting it afterwards
>> into a linked list. allocating works fine, but freeing not. i'm
>> tracking the program with htop. after
>> allocating, the percentage of mem usage stays constant ...
> Can you at least describe what do you expect to happen, and what does
> not work with freeing?
>
> bert
>>
>> the test-file is attached.
>>
>> any help is appreciated. big thanks :)
>>
>